| People v Archer |
| 2011 NY Slip Op 01667 [82 AD3d 781] |
| March 1, 2011 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v BrettArcher, Appellant. |
—[*1] Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Anthea H. Bruffee,and Jennifer Rada of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowling, J.),rendered April 29, 2009, convicting him of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of aweapon in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that improper remarks made by the prosecutor in summationdeprived him of a fair trial is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Bey, 71 AD3d 1156[2010]). In any event, the challenged remarks were proper because they constituted fair commentupon the evidence or fair response to the defense summation, or otherwise remained within the"broad bounds of rhetorical comment permissible in closing argument" (People vGalloway, 54 NY2d 396, 399 [1981]; see People v Cass, 79 AD3d 768 [2010]; People v Perez, 77 AD3d 974[2010]; People v Bey, 71 AD3d1156 [2010]; People v Dorgan,42 AD3d 505 [2007]).
The failure of the defendant's attorney to object to the prosecutor's summation did notconstitute ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel need not make an argument that haslittle or no chance of success (see Peoplev Stultz, 2 NY3d 277, 287 [2004]; People v James, 72 AD3d 844 [2010]). The defendant was affordedmeaningful representation (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708 [1998]; People vBaldi, 54 NY2d 137 [1981]). Mastro, J.P., Skelos, Eng and Sgroi, JJ., concur.